| Why the difference? 08:59 - Apr 30 with 949 views | Darth_Koont |
In Scotland 52% of Covid-19 deaths have been in hospital, 39% in care homes and 9% at home.
In England and Wales, the recent care home figures that have been added suggest 80% in hospital and just 20% in care homes.
Anyone know the reason for that? |  |
| |  |
| Why the difference? on 09:13 - Apr 30 with 902 views | Pablokuqi |
Yes the English figures yesterday are only where people in care homes had been tested positive not including those where covid 19 was likely involved. They said in press conference yesterday the figures would be increased when the full ONS figures were included. |  | | |
| Why the difference? on 09:23 - Apr 30 with 876 views | Darth_Koont |
| Why the difference? on 09:13 - Apr 30 by Pablokuqi |
Yes the English figures yesterday are only where people in care homes had been tested positive not including those where covid 19 was likely involved. They said in press conference yesterday the figures would be increased when the full ONS figures were included. |
Cheers. Good to know.
I think the true extent needs to be communicated quickly as care homes now need the focus front-line NHS and hospitalizations were receiving. The Scottish figures show that the care home deaths are lagging behind and are starting to outstrip the hospital deaths.
The graph is in here:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/29/scottish-care-homes-defend-coron | |
| |
| Why the difference? on 09:25 - Apr 30 with 873 views | ElephantintheRoom |
Impossible to say as the figures cant be trusted.
In England it is easy to surmise that a huge spike in deaths in care homes is likely to be due to covid, even though community doctors elect not to put the cause of death down to covid.... basically they are being told not to guess.so an demented old biddy who dies of pneumonia like symptoms in care will be recorded as dying of dementia, because she had been diagnosed with that.
The FT is the best source of morbidity data I've seen a few days ago they already had the actual deaths due to covid in this country as 45,000 | |
| |
| Why the difference? on 09:39 - Apr 30 with 852 views | Guthrum |
| Why the difference? on 09:25 - Apr 30 by ElephantintheRoom |
Impossible to say as the figures cant be trusted.
In England it is easy to surmise that a huge spike in deaths in care homes is likely to be due to covid, even though community doctors elect not to put the cause of death down to covid.... basically they are being told not to guess.so an demented old biddy who dies of pneumonia like symptoms in care will be recorded as dying of dementia, because she had been diagnosed with that.
The FT is the best source of morbidity data I've seen a few days ago they already had the actual deaths due to covid in this country as 45,000 |
Tho an interesting point on that was made to me yesterday. 'Flu is a notifable disease and the other most common cause of pneumonia. Thus if someone dies with suspected 'flu-related pneumonia, samples have to be sent off for testing, to see which strain of 'flu it might be. Thus it is relatively easy to eliminate 'flu from the equation. So if the symptoms match Covid and it's not 'flu, then test or no test, it probably is C-19. Making the figures more accurate than mere symptomatic guesswork.
The FT's figures were a raw mathematical extrapolation from a figure at that point many days old.
Plus, of course, the same question has to be asked of the figures in every other country - what is the basis for categorisation as C-19 (or otherwise) and how has that affected the numbers? [Post edited 30 Apr 2020 9:41]
|  |
| |
| Why the difference? on 11:27 - Apr 30 with 787 views | ElephantintheRoom |
| Why the difference? on 09:39 - Apr 30 by Guthrum |
Tho an interesting point on that was made to me yesterday. 'Flu is a notifable disease and the other most common cause of pneumonia. Thus if someone dies with suspected 'flu-related pneumonia, samples have to be sent off for testing, to see which strain of 'flu it might be. Thus it is relatively easy to eliminate 'flu from the equation. So if the symptoms match Covid and it's not 'flu, then test or no test, it probably is C-19. Making the figures more accurate than mere symptomatic guesswork.
The FT's figures were a raw mathematical extrapolation from a figure at that point many days old.
Plus, of course, the same question has to be asked of the figures in every other country - what is the basis for categorisation as C-19 (or otherwise) and how has that affected the numbers? [Post edited 30 Apr 2020 9:41]
|
Indeed - and as different countries categorise deaths in different ways nobody will ever know the exact extent of the problem.
We're almost in May now and still some of the 'daily deaths' announced during the daily liefest include actual deaths in March.
It will inevitably be a number of years before the real picture emerges as 'deaths above normal' may also be redefined by this crisis.... but the bloke doing the number crunching in the FT is certainly presenting a chilling picture at present.
I'm genuinely surprised that a government so obsessed with misinformation and targets hasn't approached this from a 'good news' perspective.... ie the number who have got it and recovered. Not that it would mean much given the lack of testing.... but it would show people who are itching to get out and about that if you are unlucky enough to go to hospital with it then your prospects aren't great... which underlines the seriousness of what the country is facing far more effectively than relatively few deaths that people dont think applies to them. | |
| |
| Why the difference? on 11:52 - Apr 30 with 759 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Why the difference? on 11:27 - Apr 30 by ElephantintheRoom |
Indeed - and as different countries categorise deaths in different ways nobody will ever know the exact extent of the problem.
We're almost in May now and still some of the 'daily deaths' announced during the daily liefest include actual deaths in March.
It will inevitably be a number of years before the real picture emerges as 'deaths above normal' may also be redefined by this crisis.... but the bloke doing the number crunching in the FT is certainly presenting a chilling picture at present.
I'm genuinely surprised that a government so obsessed with misinformation and targets hasn't approached this from a 'good news' perspective.... ie the number who have got it and recovered. Not that it would mean much given the lack of testing.... but it would show people who are itching to get out and about that if you are unlucky enough to go to hospital with it then your prospects aren't great... which underlines the seriousness of what the country is facing far more effectively than relatively few deaths that people dont think applies to them. |
Huge concern in Ireland regarding Nursing Homes.
Article 1 week ago.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52399869
Also a week ago.
https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0423/1134247-covid-19_figures/
HSE ( equivalent to NHS ) have started redeploying staff to Private Nursing Homes.
https://www.thejournal.ie/staffing-crisis-covid-19-5082403-Apr2020/
According to the Chief Medical Officer our statistics are no different to elsewhere in Europe.
https://www.thejournal.ie/covid-19-coronavirus-nursing-homes-hse-residential-car
All these figures are a week old in a very fluid situation. Also as mentioned earlier different countries use different parameters for covid-19 death rate. |  | | |
| Why the difference? on 11:55 - Apr 30 with 759 views | Guthrum |
| Why the difference? on 11:27 - Apr 30 by ElephantintheRoom |
Indeed - and as different countries categorise deaths in different ways nobody will ever know the exact extent of the problem.
We're almost in May now and still some of the 'daily deaths' announced during the daily liefest include actual deaths in March.
It will inevitably be a number of years before the real picture emerges as 'deaths above normal' may also be redefined by this crisis.... but the bloke doing the number crunching in the FT is certainly presenting a chilling picture at present.
I'm genuinely surprised that a government so obsessed with misinformation and targets hasn't approached this from a 'good news' perspective.... ie the number who have got it and recovered. Not that it would mean much given the lack of testing.... but it would show people who are itching to get out and about that if you are unlucky enough to go to hospital with it then your prospects aren't great... which underlines the seriousness of what the country is facing far more effectively than relatively few deaths that people dont think applies to them. |
Government is afraid that if it tries to make light of tens of thousands of additional/accelerated deaths (even if not going full-on Trump/Bolsonaro style), then that will cause a bad public reaction. Also doubt the public would pick up on the nuances of recovery figures as you are suggesting. Plus they are probably still too bad for anyone to want them published - recovery from a bad case of C-19 is not quick.
Doubt anyone will ever be able to give more than a very approximate global death-toll from this outbreak. Numbers will be further blurred if there are second and further waves in the future. | |
| |
| Why the difference? on 12:02 - Apr 30 with 747 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Why the difference? on 11:55 - Apr 30 by Guthrum |
Government is afraid that if it tries to make light of tens of thousands of additional/accelerated deaths (even if not going full-on Trump/Bolsonaro style), then that will cause a bad public reaction. Also doubt the public would pick up on the nuances of recovery figures as you are suggesting. Plus they are probably still too bad for anyone to want them published - recovery from a bad case of C-19 is not quick.
Doubt anyone will ever be able to give more than a very approximate global death-toll from this outbreak. Numbers will be further blurred if there are second and further waves in the future. |
They just need to add an extra graph to the daily offering showing how many are being released from hospital.
What concerns me is the number being allowed to die in care homes rather than being transferred to hospitals. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Why the difference? on 12:20 - Apr 30 with 709 views | linhdi |
| Why the difference? on 12:02 - Apr 30 by Pinewoodblue |
They just need to add an extra graph to the daily offering showing how many are being released from hospital.
What concerns me is the number being allowed to die in care homes rather than being transferred to hospitals. |
Initially, there was a concern of NHS being overwhelmed, so it was a kind of understood policy that care home inmates wouldn't be hospitalised. No point, if ICU was prioritised for younger people anyway. That might change, might have changed.
If my mum gets it, she's unlikely to survive, and I'd rather she doesn't have the disruption of moving to hospital anyway. Given other issues, she would need permanent 24/7 one-to-one care in a hospital. | | | |
| Why the difference? on 12:37 - Apr 30 with 682 views | BloomBlue |
| Why the difference? on 12:02 - Apr 30 by Pinewoodblue |
They just need to add an extra graph to the daily offering showing how many are being released from hospital.
What concerns me is the number being allowed to die in care homes rather than being transferred to hospitals. |
Allowing people to die in care homes in normal. When you reach that age if you're going to die you might as well leave them in the care home they have qualified people there rather than disrupt them by moving them form a home to a hospital just to be in a different bed to die. Yes move them to hospital if that makes a difference between death and survival, but don't force more pain on them leave them were they are. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
